Author: Site Staff

Posted on

How Much Salary Are Top Graphic Designers Getting These Days?

Dear Budget-Conscious:

The Creative Group recently released its 2012 Salary Guide, which features average starting salary ranges for more than 100 design and production, interactive, advertising and marketing, and public-relations positions. The information is based on a range of sources, including actual placements of creative professionals in 2011 by our staffing teams across North America, and an analysis of current and future hiring trends.

Overall, the numbers paint a fairly promising picture. Average starting salaries for creative professionals in Toronto are projected to increase 4 percent over 2011 levels. In the United States, salaries are expected to rise 3.5 percent. Graphic designers can expect to see even bigger increases this year, our research shows. Those with one to three years of experience can expect to make $45,000 to $58,000, a 4 percent increase over 2011 levels. Graphic designers with three to five years of experience should see a 4 percent starting salary increase as well, to a range of $55,000 to $74,000. And a graphic designer with more than five years of experience can expect to see a starting salary range of $70,000 to $92,500, a 4.8 percent increase.

Keep in mind that these salary ranges do not factor in bonuses, incentives and other forms of compensation, such as benefits and retirement packages, which can be difficult to measure. Also note that designers with interactive skills are faring even better given the strong demand for professionals who can help with online initiatives.

SOURCE: Donna Farrugia, The Creative Group, Menlo Park, California

LEARN MORE: Graphic designers can expect higher raises than most U.S. workers in 2012.

The information contained in this article is intended to provide useful information on the topic covered, but should not be construed as legal advice or a legal opinion. Also remember that state laws may differ from the federal law.

Posted on

How Do We Get Beyond Adequate Performance?

Dear Cart Before the Horse:

When people fail to live up to performance standards, in most cases it is because the performance standards were not clearly defined by the manager. To arrive at performance standards, you must address why the job exists in the first place.

What are the key accountabilities for this job? Rank each one based on its priority of importance. The next step: Decide how much time in a normal workweek you expect an employee to devote to each area of accountability.

The following questions will help define this:

• What specific knowledge must a person possess to meet the minimum performance requirements?

• Which specific soft skills should a person in this position demonstrate to perform at minimum standards?

• What are the specific hard skills that the employee needs to perform in his position at minimum standards?

• How is this particular key accountability going to intrinsically motivate the person?

• What is the appropriate behavior required to carry out the key accountability?

Once you understand this position, share this information with all employees. Assessing people who are superior performers in each of these areas enables you to identify any skills or knowledge gaps, and to plan training and development accordingly. That’s the best way to help people move beyond merely meeting performance goals to exceeding them.

SOURCE: Bill Bonnstetter, Target Training International, Scottsdale, Arizona

LEARN MORE: Driving higher performance also means making sure managers are equipped to clarify expectations and provide support. It touches on the area of coaching for performance, which is closely aligned with employee development.

The information contained in this article is intended to provide useful information on the topic covered, but should not be construed as legal advice or a legal opinion. Also remember that state laws may differ from the federal law.

Posted on

How Does Wellness Affect the Bottom Line?

Dear Health-Conscious:

A great deal of evidence demonstrates that health and wellness yield significant financial gains. Here is a sampling of conclusions drawn from a wide range of credible global research:

• “Employers get a good return on investment from health; for every US$1, [invested] up to US$6 back.” World Health Organization

• “When health and well-being are promoted, organizations are seen as 2.5 times more likely to be a best performer and 4 times less likely to lose talent within the next year.” World Economic Forum

• “An organization [that actively promotes wellness] is 3.5 times more likely to encourage creativity and innovation among employees, who are 8 times more likely to be engaged in what they do.” World Economic Forum

Even a company that dispassionately views employees purely as “assets” would logically want to invest in wellness, just as they invest in maintaining their physical plant and equipment. Like well-maintained machinery, healthy people perform better and cost less.

Direct medical expenses are but the tip of the iceberg when it comes to what poor health actually costs your company. The World Economic Forum estimates that medical payments total less than 40 percent when compared to the productivity losses that organizations suffer from employee absenteeism and “presenteeism”—people who are well enough to show up for work, but not able to perform at full capacity.

Healthy employees are more present, more attentive, more energetic and more focused. Of course, if you have healthy people working in an unhealthy company, the environment will soon undermine the benefits of your wellness initiatives. Global research conducted by Healthy Companies International over two decades suggests that a “healthy” company is one in which healthy leaders build healthy cultures that inspire healthy people to drive healthy performance.

Healthy leaders are healthy not only in the physical sense, but also emotionally, spiritually, socially and intellectually.

Healthy culture unites people around a higher purpose and promotes freedom, self-discipline and responsibility.

Healthy people are agile, optimistic, curious, collaborative and self-motivated.

Healthy performance fits classic business definitions, e.g., sustained profitable growth. Healthy companies achieve healthy performance by intrinsically valuing the health of their leaders, culture and people.

In sum, if your goal is economic growth, you want to invest strategically in the wellness of individual employees and in the health of your organization.

SOURCE: Stephen Parker, president, Healthy Cos. International, Arlington, Virginia

LEARN MORE: In light of recent research, it may be more vital than ever that companies nurture a culture of wellness.

Workforce Management Online, January 2012 — Register Now!

The information contained in this article is intended to provide useful information on the topic covered, but should not be construed as legal advice or a legal opinion. Also remember that state laws may differ from the federal law.

Posted on

How Do We Convince Execs Who Are Skeptical of Performance Management?

Dear Voice in the Wilderness:

Failing to assess and coach your people regularly is costing you money. It’s the difference between what they are delivering and what they could be delivering at their best.

Recognize your people when they achieve and help them identify and improve upon lessons learned.

If this performance leadership, both informal and systemic is absent, people will generally continue doing the job the way they’ve always done it. If you’re hoping for some type of change or improvement, it will at best take much longer than you will want.

Organizations that welcome candid assessments and use them constructively are more likely to attract, retain and maximize higher-performing people than organizations that don’t value them. That’s not only good karma but also a smart move for your bottom line.

One of the most significant hurdles standing in the way of a performance-leadership culture is history with bad performance-review processes. But a culture of performance leadership is about more than just annual reviews.

A yearly performance review does not maximize your human capital. If that’s all you’re doing, there’s probably more harm than good in it. Instead, consider these best practices:

1. Culture of Truth: It’s critical to generate an ongoing, real-time culture of candor in your enterprise. People must be encouraged to be frank and constructive with each other. It’s up to leadership to make it a cultural value in your organization to do that. Truly great teams share openly with each other about what’s working and not working, in ways intended to make everyone more effective.

2. Regular Assessment and Coaching: Everyone who manages people in your organization should plan to have coaching conversations throughout the year. Employees should not be left to wonder if what they are working on in their own development fits into the goals of the organization.

3. Organizational Feedback: Just as individuals are expected to be developing themselves, the organization needs to invest in self-assessment and development.

You know it’s time for a performance-leadership culture if these elements are absent or sporadic in your organization. If you imagine your people operating 10 percent more effectively in the first year, then take a look at the revenue they drive and the expenses they incur and do the math. Make this the priority you know it needs to be and yield the better bottom line that goes with it.

SOURCE: David Peck, Goodstone Group, Palm Springs, California

Workforce Management Online, January 2012 — Register Now!

The information contained in this article is intended to provide useful information on the topic covered, but should not be construed as legal advice or a legal opinion. Also remember that state laws may differ from the federal law.

Posted on

Click, Click, Click Revisited: Complete That Training or No Bonus for You

I hadn’t seen my business colleague for a year. We met again recently for the same annual review we had in 2010.

He had worked all weekend and looked worn down. I asked him if he had a lot of year-end deals closing. The good news is that business has picked up. But a different deadline kept him in the office. As he did last December, he had to complete a library of compliance modules by mid-month to be eligible for his annual bonus. So he did.

I asked him what he recalled from last year’s courses. His quick, blunt answer: “Nothing.”

I asked him how it went this time. The answer: “No different.” However, this cycle he noted that the courses had recommended lengths and each one had a timer on the screen metering his progress from section to section. Someone could track how long he spent going through each course. If he raced through a program to finish fast, maybe his too-quick pace would stand out.

He realized he had three objectives: get through the curriculum, get his bonus, but not get in trouble. He and his friends figured out the solution: They started each module then minimized the screen. While the timer kept moving, they did a few other things, moved back to the course and then completed each section at their own pace while “honoring” the recommended time frame.

This may have helped him get his bonus and his employer, if needed, build part of a legal defense. As I’ve written elsewhere, this kind of learning design distorts the point of compliance programs which are intended to prevent, detect, and correct problems. Just this past year, we’ve seen the results of compliance breakdowns that failed to stop or uncover misdeeds or discoverable hazards.

In many instances, required tests, courses and forms proved as worthless as blank paper or, more currently, terabytes of unused storage capacity.

Within the past month or so, MF Global collapsed and billions of customer assets have disappeared. It’s possible that their funds, supposedly immune from diversion to cover institutional losses, were applied for that purpose.

Ananda Radhakrishanan, director of the division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight at the Commodities Futures Trading Commission, responsible for monitoring MF Global, commented: “We can’t be at every firm overseeing every activity. We have to expect people to understand the rules and adhere to them.”

My colleague is a person of character, integrity and values. He doesn’t need to click through scores of screens to follow key standards he already knows and works by daily.

While he had motivation to complete his coursework, he lacked even a smoldering—much less a burning desire—to learn. Somewhere else, though, there are others who will get their bonuses after mindlessly but successfully clicking through module after module.

They’ll learn nothing—though they will have needed to—and dismiss what had been delivered, complicit in the true spirit in which their “training” had been presented. But what we really should be concerned about are organizations that subvert the purpose of compliance even unwittingly from getting things right to getting things done.

As Hamlet said, “Aye, there’s the rub,” for we will pay the price.

Stephen Paskoff is president and CEO of Atlanta-based ELI Inc., a provider of ethics and compliance learning solutions. He can be contacted at info@eliinc.com.

Posted on

Locker Room Leadership—Is That a Winning Workplace Strategy?

I met with a group of talented, thoughtful executives recently. We discussed values, culture and the role of speaking up in the face of organizational misdeeds. As we talked about leadership, I was asked a challenging question.

“You see top coaches walk right up to players, scream at them, grab them, get right in their faces, bless them out in public. They motivate—they get results. They win championships. They care about the team and players respect them. Why is it not proper for us to act the same way from time to time in our workplaces?”

I thought about my response for a few seconds. Right now, as we root for our top teams at the end of an exciting football season, we all want our favorites to wind up as champions.

As adults, when we go to games or watch them, we cheer, scream, yell, jump up and down and do high-fives. But the academic or professional football field, basketball court or hockey rink is not the same as the workplace that most of us inhabit. The goals are different as are the expectations of the participants and the overall context. The rules are different, too.

While lessons of teamwork, sacrifice, discipline and focus learned on fields of play can last a lifetime, some of the leadership strategies that succeed in athletic combat diminish rather than maximize workplace results. Health care professionals who routinely yell at and insult colleagues may get the job done, but they may also cause distractions leading to treatment errors, complications and even death. Executives who badger their direct reports may get them to work feverishly and cause them to keep quiet about problems, hazards and risks for fear of being marginalized, if not dismissed.

Yes, there may be exceptions, instances when in a quick passing moment, vital action—clear, forceful, direct, powerful and attention getting—is needed. There’s a reason why we refer to the “heat of battle.” But fortunately, those are relatively rare and extraordinary involving grave, immediate and potentially catastrophic circumstances.

The issue is not just the difference between sport and work. Getting in the face of a player in their teens or early 20s in the midst of a raging crowd on a big-stakes play in a moment of high tension may be what’s needed.

The crowd is cheering as the bands blare out their fight songs. What happens in the next seconds or minutes can determine how a game and whole season turn out. With adrenaline surging in every direction, that may be the medicine of the moment needed to engage young adults. But that’s not the case in most business workplaces.

There, winning extends over a long period of time and is not measured week to week or in the context of a single “play” that unfolds in a matter of seconds. In most of our jobs, there’s a time and need for direct, unambiguous, clear direction.

That doesn’t extend to demeaning and embarrassing others to get a point across. That’s the part of locker room leadership that needs to stay in the locker room, if there’s a limited place for it there at all.

Stephen Paskoff is president and CEO of Atlanta-based ELI Inc., a provider of ethics and compliance learning solutions. He can be contacted at info@eliinc.com.

Posted on

Will A Checklist Help Us Recruit More Effectively?

Dear Kept in the Dark:

The checklist is the easy part. Before tackling that, however, let’s first examine the underlying problem: that upper management isn’t informing your recruiters until well after positions become vacant.

This sounds like a “disconnect” in which human resources partners fail to keep each other informed, rather than an oversight by upper management. But learning about terminated employees earlier in the game is not the only condition you’ll want to address.

How prepared are you for downstream changes in your business (six to 12 months out) that may require you to recruit a huge volume of experienced professionals with scarce new skills—more people than your organization has experience recruiting?

Also, think about the problem of planned growth within divisions that possess solid succession plans, where you know who will step into newly created positions. If these high-potential, high-performance employees are scheduled to move from their current positions, maybe your recruiting effort should focus on looking for candidates to backstop these high performers now.

We could actually make a long list of situations where the added value of recruiting might resonate with hiring managers, HR partners, upper management and other stakeholders. Rather than a checklist, what you need is a mutual agreement that is written and signed by the different parties responsible for recruiting.

Here’s how it should look. First, it typically arises out of a series of discussions between human resources and other business leaders to establish the quality of your services. These service level agreements, or SLAs, are primarily a contracting tool keyed to establish and meet clients’ expectations. The client and the service provider (recruiting, for example, or more likely HR) determine in advance which services and performance levels will be provided, and decide how the success or failure of an SLA is measured.

In staffing, an SLA should essentially speak to the expectations of recruiters, recruiting coordinators, interviewers and hiring managers, since their partnership is essential to the attainment of your goals. Any worthwhile agreement would also describe the process, roles, timeframes, and accountabilities for all parties.

An SLA for recruiting might include an outline of the complete process used by recruiters and hiring manages to fill job openings as quickly and efficiently as possible. A staffing SLA takes managers step by step through this process—from submitting a requisition to extending an offer—and notes applicable turnaround times.

The most competitive corporations use SLAs to manage the quality of their process, and it isn’t unusual to have several SLAs in place between internal HR functions, i.e., recruiting and other HR services.

The solution isn’t to look for, and adopt, an SLA template (although there are many). Rather, you should engage all the stakeholders in your process: hiring managers, upper management, recruiters, recruiting coordinators, vendors, and candidates, and establish a level of service they can expect from you—and what you need in return to commit to it.

SOURCE: Gerry Crispin, CareerXroads, Kendall Park, New Jersey

LEARN MORE: Get more recruiting insights by reading “Tips for Fast Turnaround.”

The information contained in this article is intended to provide useful information on the topic covered, but should not be construed as legal advice or a legal opinion. Also remember that state laws may differ from the federal law.

Posted on

How Do We Correlate Performance Management and New Training?

Dear Newbie:

Performance appraisals are a useful means to identify training and development needs for staff at all levels. There is actually a dual purpose to appraisals. The customary purpose is to have an equitable basis for rewarding effective performance that has occurred during the past year. The second purpose, however, has been increasingly important in light of the rapidly changing work competitive demands of an evolving marketplace. That purpose focuses on the future by leveraging employees’ strengths, addressing deficiencies in skills or knowledge, and most important, by guiding future individual and team development.

Most, if not all, performance appraisals have a section on individual development. However, experience suggests that these developmental actions are rarely tracked or followed up to ensure implementation.

Most appraisals will evaluate both what the employee contributed to the organization (e.g., accomplishment of work objectives) as well as how they accomplished that work. The “how” is often reflected in an organization’s competency model, which defines the factors required for effective performance in specific jobs or job families. Increasingly, organizations are using the same competencies to select, appraise and train. Quarterly or even monthly performance reviews, commonly used in sales positions, are now being used for other functions. More frequent performance appraisal allows managers and subordinates to track learning, changed behavior and development. It also allows for small “wins” to be recognized, which is important to help sustain behavior change.

Also, when an appraisal targets competencies an employee needs to be effective in a specific organization, job or job family, it helps to structure how people in that organization see themselves and others. The competencies are clearly defined, and corresponding behavioral statements that exemplify the skill are individually rated as well. These provide a picture of the employees’ strengths and learning needs on a scale of novice to expert. The more precisely defined these behaviors are, the more targeted the training that can be developed for addressing those needs.

Probably the best advantage of leveraging your appraisal process is that it already exists and is part of the regular management practice. It is also directly linked to job performance.

SOURCE: Jan Margolis, managing director, Applied Research Corp., Metuchen, New Jersey

LEARN MORE: Learning means little if it doesn’t result in the desired behavioral changes, writes author Stanton Heister.

The information contained in this article is intended to provide useful information on the topic covered, but should not be construed as legal advice or a legal opinion. Also remember that state laws may differ from the federal law.

Posted on

Are HR Manuals Outmoded in the Digital Age?

Dear Useless Exercise:

A human resources manual/employee handbook may seem to be a trite item to distribute, especially if most employees glance at it only to toss it in the trash. However, the purpose of an employee handbook is to offer a set of guidelines and “house rules” for the employees to follow—however common-sense the policies and procedures may seem.

Compare your HR manual to the set of instructions that come with a piece of equipment. You have the gist of how to use it and can, by deductive reasoning, make fair assumptions as what not to do to break it. In fact, when people open the box, many throw out the instructions thinking “I know how this works, I don’t need it.” However, by throwing out the instructions you inevitably lose the details of how the equipment works and, worse, how to fix it in case it breaks.

An employee handbook is essentially the instruction guide for employees to reference should they run into questions related to company policies and procedures such as: vacation policies, Family and Medical Leave Act guidelines and employee benefits. The handbook also lays out company ground rules so employees are aware of what actions may result in a write-up or, worse, termination.

Further, a handbook solidifies company policies and procedures to protect the employer and employees should a dispute occur. As such, employees should sign an acknowledgement form agreeing to the terms of the handbook, and copies should be retained by both parties.

How often should a manual be updated?

Review your policies and procedures annually to make sure they reflect current state, federal and/or local regulations. If you make changes in real time to existing policies and procedures, be sure to communicate the changes to your employees. You also may request that employees sign an acknowledgment form to indicate they received, reviewed and understand the new changes in the handbook.

SOURCE: Tina T. Chen, Employco USA Inc., Chicago

The information contained in this article is intended to provide useful information on the topic covered, but should not be construed as legal advice or a legal opinion. Also remember that state laws may differ from the federal law.

Posted on

How Do We Overcome the Perception of Favoritism?

Dear Oops:

As you’ve shown by writing to Dear Workforce, this is an important problem: Your integrity is being questioned. While you may not have favored your friend, appearances are important. People can make decisions based only on what they see. That’s one reason why, in general, it’s good to tell people your rationale when making unpopular decisions: They may not be aware of all the information or issues.

If you have set up systems through which you can benchmark performance or outcomes so that you can objectify rather than personalize performance, it would help. As you suggest, there are likely to be more issues down the road, especially when the time comes for performance evaluations or disciplinary actions. You may need to excuse yourself from supervision in some cases.

In fairness to you, managers are often seen as being friendlier with some employees than others—every person finds it easier to be close to some people than others. That’s one reason that open and equal access is important. The perception may exist that you are not being fully open to others’ suggestions. Regardless of whether that perception is based on reality, you need to address it directly.

Once you have made clear your rationale, the next step is to actively solicit (and act on) ideas from other employees. We’re not talking about things like “Should we get a new water cooler?” but rather on work-process and similar changes.

We recommend doing this informally by talking with all employees and asking for their input, on the spot or whenever they’re ready. A formal program may seem as if you’re not taking it seriously, versus this one-on-one conversation. Any time you ask for ideas or suggestions, however, you must make sure of a few things:

• You should be biased toward action—if the idea is seen as being neutral or “only a little costly,” it should be adopted. This encourages people to bring forth more ideas, (often “neutral” ideas) do save money or raise quality.

• Before rejecting an idea, make sure you fully understand its costs and benefits. This may require additional conversation. Likewise, when rejecting an idea, give strong reasons why and seriously consider counterarguments.

• The person who proposed an idea can be empowered and made responsible for its implementation—as long as he or she has reasonable support.

• You must be willing to put a reasonable amount of time and effort into soliciting, considering and enacting ideas.

In the future, carefully consider whether your other reports have similar encouragement to give input (and are seen as having similar opportunities and encouragement) and whether those with the same job role really do have the same access to you as your friend does.

SOURCE: Katherine Zatz and David Zatz, Toolpack Consulting, Teaneck, New Jersey

LEARN MORE: On the flip side of favoritism are morale-damaging employee cliques.

The information contained in this article is intended to provide useful information on the topic covered, but should not be construed as legal advice or a legal opinion. Also remember that state laws may differ from the federal law.